Abstract

Injury has both physical and psychological sequelae for athletes. In addition to this, psychological variables influence the nature and duration of the injury experience. Psychological research into the injury experiences of professional rugby league players is limited and fragmented. The aim of the research was to determine which psychological variables may be related to the subsequent injury experiences of professional rugby league players. During a two year prospective study, professional level rugby league players (N=53) completed psychometric scales and had their injury experiences recorded. The psychometric scales utilised consisted of the Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style (TAIS) and the Extended Attributional Style Questionnaire (EASQ). The injury variables included the number of injuries, injury severity, and time taken to resume playing.

A comparison of playing position indicated that forwards spent less time on the field due to being involved with a greater amount of full body contact (F1, 47=16.78, p=0.00; d=0.98). Forwards sustained more injuries than backs as a result of more physical contact (F1, 47=4.21, p=0.04; d=0.24). Such differences supports the continued differentiation between playing position in future studies on professional rugby league players. Discriminant function analysis revealed one significant function (λ = 0.15, p<0.01) indicating that professional rugby league players, who are overloaded by information (OIT), have lowered self-esteem (SES), and lower physical orientation (PO) had more severe injuries. Classification procedures correctly classified 84.9% of participants into their respective injury severity groups. The TAIS and the EASQ had adequate test-retest reliability indicating attentional, control, interpersonal and attributional variables to be stable over time. Spearman rank order correlations between TAIS and EASQ subscales revealed that players who tend to make global attributions were more likely to have better attentional style (p<0.05), less likely to become overloaded (p<0.01), process information more successfully (p<0.01) and have higher self-esteem (p<0.01). Participants who made both global and stable attributions were more likely to have better attentional style (p<0.05), less likely to become overloaded by information (p<0.01), were less impulsive (p<0.05) and had higher self-esteem (p<0.01). In the instance of stable attributions, individuals were less likely to worry (p<0.05) and better able to express themselves (p<0.05). When explanatory style was compared with severity of injury, players who made global (F2, 53=5.91, p=0.00, d=0.86) and stable (F2, 53=5.60, p=0.00; d=0.84) attributions had a higher proportion of severe injury ratings. Utilisation of a prospective design is recommended for future research with injured athletes. Further research on the mechanisms underlying the relationship between attentional and attributional style and injury is recommended.